Pitts v. State

Decision Date11 October 1979
Docket NumberNo. 58288,58288
Citation151 Ga.App. 691,261 S.E.2d 435
PartiesPITTS v. The STATE.
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

Howard G. Sokol, Macon, for appellant.

Lewis R. Slaton, Dist. Atty., Joseph J. Drolet, R. David Petersen, Asst. Dist. Attys., for appellee.

BIRDSONG, Judge.

The appellant Pitts was found not guilty of robbery and aggravated assault by reason of insanity. Thereafter, in accordance with Code Ann. § 27-1503 he was committed to the Central State Hospital. After more than 30 days of hospitalization, an application for release on his behalf was filed by the hospital authority. A hearing was held but release was denied. Pitts filed this appeal from the order denying him release. Held :

1. Pitts enumerates four alleged errors. Each amounts to a bare conclusion by Pitts based upon the findings and order of the trial court following the hearing on the request for release. These enumerations allege that the trial court did not require the state to prove that Pitts meets the criteria for civil commitment; that the court erred in applying a presumption of continuing incompetency simply because Pitts had been found not guilty by reason of insanity; that the court improperly shifted the burden of showing competency to appellant; and, that the evidence did not support the court's determination that Pitts met the criteria for civil commitment. There is not the slightest predicate in the order of the trial court that could give rise to any complaint that the trial court had obviated the burden of the state, shifted the burden to the appellant, or given any reliance to a continuing presumption of insanity.

The history of this case shows that the judge refusing release was also the trial judge in the trial of the robbery and aggravated assault offenses. Because of a serious doubt as to mental competency or responsibility prior to trial, the court caused Pitts to be psychiatrically examined. In summary the psychiatric report to the court indicated that Pitts suffered from a significant psychiatric illness best categorized as schizophrenia. The report stated that Pitts had a record of psychiatric hospitalization at Central State Hospital in 1971, 1972, 1974, and 1975; at Atlanta Regional Hospital in 1974; and in Grady Memorial in 1977. Pitts himself apparently informed the examining physician that the vast majority of these periods of hospitalization followed overt suicide attempts. At the time of the examination in 1977, Pitts revealed an unkempt appearance, inappropriate action, grimaces facies, anxious mood, extremely flat effect, moderately loose associations, evidence of visual hallucinations of a command nature telling Pitts to hurt himself or kill himself, evidence of suicidal ideations and evidence of persecutory delusions. At that time Pitts was experiencing psychotic decompensation in spite of medication. It was recommended that Pitts be transferred to Central State Hospital. Based upon this recommendation, the trial court ordered Pitts' transfer to Central State.

After his transfer, Pitts denied any suicidal ideation or delusional ideas. The doctor at Central State concluded that while Pitts had a history of emotional problems over the past several years, including hospitalization, he considered Pitts mentally competent to stand trial.

Upon Pitts' return for trial, the trial court still entertained doubts as to Pitts' competency and ordered yet another examination. Grady Memorial Hospital, in addition to its earlier observations of Pitts' mental condition, then observed that Pitts had a long history of psychiatric illness, first being diagnosed as schizophrenic at age 17. Its second report also stated that over the years Pitts had been a difficult management problem refusing treatment and medications and at times of decompensation of his illness, Pitts had suffered several episodes of violent and impulsive behavior. The hospital's senior resident psychiatrist concluded that while Pitts was competent to stand trial, in view of his past history of violent and aggressive behavior when out of treatment and off medication, that Pitts be placed in a long-term highly structured environment for management and stabilization. After this final examination, Pitts was tried for the robbery and aggravated assault. The trial court entered findings of not guilty by reason of insanity. Pitts was then committed to Central State Hospital in accordance with the provisions of Code Ann. § 27-1503. Approximately nine months later the hospital authority requested the hearing under Code Chapter 88-5 stating as the reason that in the opinion of the resident doctors, Pitts then did not meet the criteria for civil commitment.

The only additional evidence presented at...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Taylor v. Commissioner of Mental Health and Mental Retardation
    • United States
    • Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (US)
    • 14 Agosto 1984
    ...... absence of any legislative specification of the applicable standard of proof on such a petition, the Superior Court--following the precedent of State v. Shackford, 262 A.2d 359 (Me.1970)--required the petitioner to prove his eligibility for the proposed modified release treatment "beyond a ... See Pitts v. State, 151 Ga.App. 691, 261 S.E.2d 435, 438 (1979); People v. Howell, 196 Colo. 408, 586 P.2d 27, 30-31 (1978). . 25 See Alaska Stat. § ......
  • Benham v. Edwards, Civ. A. No. C80-78R.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. Northern District of Georgia
    • 14 Noviembre 1980
    ...Skelton v. Slaton, 243 Ga. 426, 254 S.E.2d 704 (1979); Pennewell v. State, 148 Ga.App. 611, 251 S.E.2d 832 (1979); Pitts v. State, 151 Ga.App. 691, 261 S.E.2d 435 (1979); Dubose v. State, 148 Ga.App. 9, 251 S.E.2d 15 Following a finding of not guilty by reason of insanity,3 the trial court ......
  • Benham v. Edwards, 80-9052
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • 27 Mayo 1982
    ...See Clark v. State, 245 Ga. 629, 266 S.E.2d 466 (1980); Skelton v. Slaton, 243 Ga. 426, 254 S.E.2d 704 (1979); Pitts v. State, 151 Ga.App. 691, 261 S.E.2d 435 (1979); Pennewell v. State, 148 Ga.App. 611, 251 S.E.2d 832 (1979); Dubose v. State, 148 Ga.App. 9, 251 S.E.2d 15 (1978). The statut......
  • Clark v. State
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Georgia
    • 9 Abril 1980
    ...once proved to exist. Accordingly, it has been held in Pennewell v. State, 148 Ga.App. 611(1), 251 S.E.2d 832 (1979); Pitts v. State, 151 Ga.App. 691, 261 S.E.2d 435 (1979) and in this case, that where a defendant who has been acquitted of a crime by reason of insanity is ordered committed ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT